Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 13, 2006 / Notices 54101 

Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, 

the NRC is issuing this environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action: 

The proposed action would allow the 

usage of the Hemyc fire barrier wrap 

installed in the West Cable Tunnel to 

protect a safe shutdown power cable. 

The licensee stated that recent tests 

indicate the Hemyc fire barrier lacks 

sufficient evidence to demonstrate that 

it meets the acceptance criteria for a 

rated 1 hour fire barrier. But the licensee 

states that the Hemyc fire barrier will 

provide a reasonable level of resistance 

to fire due to the fact that the area where 

the fire barrier wrap is located has no 

significant ignition sources other than 

cables, has available manual 

suppression capability, is equipped 

with automatic fire suppression and fire 

detection, and administrative controls 

limit the presence of transient 

combustible materials and transient 

ignition sources. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s application dated 

July 27, 2005, as supplemented on May 

17, 2006. 

The Need for the Proposed Action: 

The proposed exemption from 10 CFR 

part 50, Appendix R, III.G.2.c, is needed 

in response to NRC Information Notice 

2005–07. The information notice 

provided licensees the details of Hemyc 

electrical raceway fire barrier system 

(ERFBS) full-scale fire tests conducted 

by the NRC’s Office of Nuclear 

Regulatory Research. The test results 

concluded that the Hemyc ERFBS does 

not provide the level of protection 

expected for a 1 hour rated fire barrier, 

as originally designed. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Proposed Action: The NRC has 

completed its safety evaluation of the 

proposed action and concludes that the 

configuration of the fire zone under 

review provides reasonable assurance 

that a severe fire is not plausible and the 

existing fire protection features are 

adequate. The details of the staff’s 

evaluation will be provided in the 

exemption that will be issued as part of 

the letter to the licensee approving the 

exemption to the regulation. Based on 

the presence of area-wide smoke 

detection; the presence of automatic 

area and in-tray fire suppression and 

manual fire suppression; fire barrier 

protection at the boundaries of the fire 

zone; the existing Hemyc configuration 

in the fire zone; implementation of 

transient combustibles controls 

including proposed revisions for hot 

work in the vicinity of the Hemyc 

configuration; and the absence of 

significant combustible loading and 

ignition sources, the NRC staff finds that 

the use of this Hemyc fire barrier in this 

zone will not significantly increase the 

consequences from a fire in this fire 

zone. 

The proposed action will not 

significantly increase the probability or 

consequences of accidents. No changes 

are being made in the types of effluents 

that may be released off site. There is no 

significant increase in the amount of 

any effluent released off site. There is no 

significant increase in occupational or 

public radiation exposure. Therefore, 

there are no significant radiological 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. 

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 

action does not have a potential to affect 

any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 

other environmental impact. Therefore, 

there are no significant non-radiological 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action: As 

an alternative to the proposed action, 

the NRC staff considered denial of the 

proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’

alternative). Denial of the application 

would result in no change in current 

environmental impacts. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action and the alternative action are 

similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources: The 

action does not involve the use of any 

different resources than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for the James 

A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 

dated March 1973. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted: In 

accordance with its stated policy, on 

August 9, 2006, the NRC staff consulted 

with the New York State official, John 

Spath, of the New York State Energy 

Research and Development Authority, 

regarding the environmental impact of 

the proposed action. The State official 

had no comments. 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the environmental 

assessment, the NRC concludes that the 

proposed action will not have a 

significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment. Accordingly, the 

NRC has determined not to prepare an 

environmental impact statement for the 

proposed action. 

For further details with respect to the 

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter 

dated July 27, 2005, Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) accession number 

ML052210382, as supplemented on May 

17, 2006, ADAMS accession number 

ML061530108. Documents may be 

examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), 

located at One White Flint North, Public 

File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible electronically from the 

ADAMS Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC 

Web site, 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or 

by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day 

of September 2006. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Patrick D. Milano, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch I–1, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E6–15133 Filed 9–12–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT 

CORPORATION 

September 14, 2006 Public Hearing; 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

OPIC’s Sunshine Act notice of its 

Public Hearing in Conjunction with 

each Board meeting was published in 

the Federal Register (Volume 71, 

Number 166, Pages 50949 and 50950) on 

August 28, 2006. No requests were 

received to provide testimony or submit 

written statements for the record; 

therefore, OPIC’s public hearing in 

conjunction with OPIC’s September 21, 

2006 Board of Directors meeting 

scheduled for 2 p.m. on September 14, 

2006 has been cancelled. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Information on the hearing cancellation 

may be obtained from Connie M. Downs 

at (202) 336–8438, via facsimile at (202) 

218–0136, or via e-mail at 

cdown@opic.gov. 

Dated: September 11, 2006. 

Connie M. Downs, 

OPIC Corporate Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 06–7653 Filed 9–11–06; 11:55 am] 

BILLING CODE 3210–01–M 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES